3 ms·

My mind boggles when I think about this question. Here's a list of tech that we got either directly or indirectly from space related R&D: Cell phone cameras, t

My mind boggles when I think about this question. Here's a list of tech that we got either directly or indirectly from space related R&D: Cell phone cameras, the computer program that allowed the development of a bunch of consumer electronics like the dustbuster, memory foam, ear thermometers, docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA) (used in baby formula), roadway safety grooves, polycrystalline alumina (used in invisible braces, among other things), scratch-resistant lenses, the vertical "winglets" at the end of aircraft wings, cardiac pumps, portable computers, blow rubber molding (eg. from Nike Air sneakers), freeze dried fruit, foil blankets, crystal silicon solar power cells, electrolytic silver iodizers (for water purification), thermoelectric plane wing de-icing, gps without cell signal, aluminized polyester insulation, cochlear implants is in an honorable mention that someone from NASA invented after learning the principles from his time work on space shuttle electronics, wireless headphones, packaged food safety protocols, CAT scans, uv-blocking sunglasses, ski boots, better rubber tires. Doing what these companies are doing requires all kinds of novel engineering, it would be bizarre that all of it only applies exactly to space tourism and nothing else. I really don't understand all the cynicism around a private space race considering all the potential good it could do.

dstick 5y ago
The cynicism stems from the fact that it’s billionaires in the driver seat of this space race. It feels more like a pissing contest, than something driven by scientific curiosity. The same can be said for getting a man on the moon. But I think that it’s not USA vs USSR but Branson vs Musk vs Bezos that fuels the negativity. But your points are valid! There are good things coming out of these R&D spenditures.
- gregoriol 5y ago
  Getting to the moon does seem to provide some interesting stuff for some future and science: being able to regularly set foot on another planet (which was already achieved a bit but has way to go, like the current/new launcher reusability vs Apollo), set a base on another planet, somehow live on another planet, ... at least there is a clear next-step with Mars after that and for science to understand how humans would live in other environments, how to provide or produce stuff there, ...
- beardyw 5y ago
  Hey, when billionaires spend money it's wealth distribution too. There are people paying their bills on the back of this.
cblconfederate 5y ago
we could also have gotten who knows what tech by investing in health equipment or longevity, there's nothing unique about space tech research (except from being a priority for defense)
drclau 5y ago
If I understand correctly, the GP asked specifically about this type, not space flight in general. And I think it’s a reasonable question: what will this edge-of-space-flight lead to? Is this an opportunity to reduce costs of getting to space even more? Will it be faster and/or safer? For instance, SpaceX and the likes already go to space (proper), and the benefits are more obvious.
moomin 5y ago
The thing is, you answered someone asking if Virgin Galactic was a pointless toy for rich people with whether or not NASA was a waste of time. By the implicit metric you’ve set, Virgin Galactic is a colossal failure.
atoav 5y ago
> I really don't understand all the cynicism around a private space race considering all the potential good it could do. Just factor in the tax evasion of those flying into space, and the fact that both society and infrastructure is crumbling left and right, then you might get there as well. Leaving the orbit as a collective effort of humanity to show such a thing is possible is something entirely different to tax evaders doing it for their private pleasure with money they owe to society.
ekianjo 5y ago
> I really don't understand all the cynicism around a private space race considering all the potential good it could do. That line of reasoning is deeply flawed, because we would have got this kind of things in a much cheaper way without doing all the senseless space race (especially the one driven by governments) for absolutely no proper reason or vision. At least now with SpaceX there are tons of actual space-related applications, but NASA had none.

dstick 5y ago

The cynicism stems from the fact that it’s billionaires in the driver seat of this space race. It feels more like a pissing contest, than something driven by scientific curiosity. The same can be said for getting a man on the moon. But I think that it’s not USA vs USSR but Branson vs Musk vs Bezos that fuels the negativity. But your points are valid! There are good things coming out of these R&D spenditures.

gregoriol 5y ago
Getting to the moon does seem to provide some interesting stuff for some future and science: being able to regularly set foot on another planet (which was already achieved a bit but has way to go, like the current/new launcher reusability vs Apollo), set a base on another planet, somehow live on another planet, ... at least there is a clear next-step with Mars after that and for science to understand how humans would live in other environments, how to provide or produce stuff there, ...
beardyw 5y ago
Hey, when billionaires spend money it's wealth distribution too. There are people paying their bills on the back of this.

cblconfederate 5y ago

we could also have gotten who knows what tech by investing in health equipment or longevity, there's nothing unique about space tech research (except from being a priority for defense)

drclau 5y ago

If I understand correctly, the GP asked specifically about this type, not space flight in general. And I think it’s a reasonable question: what will this edge-of-space-flight lead to? Is this an opportunity to reduce costs of getting to space even more? Will it be faster and/or safer? For instance, SpaceX and the likes already go to space (proper), and the benefits are more obvious.

moomin 5y ago

The thing is, you answered someone asking if Virgin Galactic was a pointless toy for rich people with whether or not NASA was a waste of time. By the implicit metric you’ve set, Virgin Galactic is a colossal failure.

atoav 5y ago

> I really don't understand all the cynicism around a private space race considering all the potential good it could do. Just factor in the tax evasion of those flying into space, and the fact that both society and infrastructure is crumbling left and right, then you might get there as well. Leaving the orbit as a collective effort of humanity to show such a thing is possible is something entirely different to tax evaders doing it for their private pleasure with money they owe to society.

ekianjo 5y ago

> I really don't understand all the cynicism around a private space race considering all the potential good it could do. That line of reasoning is deeply flawed, because we would have got this kind of things in a much cheaper way without doing all the senseless space race (especially the one driven by governments) for absolutely no proper reason or vision. At least now with SpaceX there are tons of actual space-related applications, but NASA had none.